← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./80293/2024bail rejected

Shamsher Khalifa v. The State Of Bihar

2024-11-21Mr. Justice Rajiv Roy2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.80293 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-297 Year-2024 Thana- BALIYA District- Begusarai ====================================================== Shamsher Khalifa Son of Ghuran Khalifa Resident of Village- Mathurapur Noor Jamapur, P.S.- Ballia, District- Begusarai ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rahul Singh, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Kumar Ranjit Ranjan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 21-11-2024 Heard the parties.

2. The petitioner is in judicial custody in connection with Ballia P.S. Case No. 297 of 2024 for the offence under Sections 126(2), 109(1), 352, 351(2) and 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and section 27 of the Arms Act, lodged on 09.09.2024 by the informant, Sumit Kumar Yadav.

3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that he is a social worker and when he arrived near Railway Station, this petitioner pointed weapon on him and after abusing threatened him of dire consequences claiming that he will be running the prostitution business and anyone coming in between will be killed, this led to F.I.R.

4. Though, learned counsel for the petitioner tried to show his innocence submitting that the informant is a social

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80293 of 2024(2) dt.21-11-2024 2/2 worker and he is in the habit of extortion, learned APP has taken this Court to paragraph no.3 of the petition to show that not only he has six criminal antecedent under his belt, is actually facing trial in two Sessions Trial cases under section 307 of the I.P.C. as also 366-A of the I.P.C.

5. Considering the submissions put forward by the parties as also the criminal antecedent that he petitioner has, for the present this Court is not inclined to extend him the privilege of bail.

6. Accordingly, the present bail application stands rejected.

(Rajiv Roy, J) vinayak/- U T